VERY,VERY HOT READS, I Would Read The News In This Thread This Thead Is To post Any Thing Ye Want About The News,,NEWS WAS MOVED,READ MY FIRST POS...

OS X flaw exposes Macs
By Joris Evers
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: February 21, 2006, 2:59 PM PST
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBack E-mail this story to a friendE-mail View this story formatted for printingPrint

update A serious flaw in Mac OS X could be a conduit for attackers to install malicious code on computers running the Apple Computer software, experts warned Tuesday.

The security problem is the third to surface for the operating system in the past week. It exposes Mac users to risks that are more familiar to Windows users: Visiting a malicious Web site using Apple's Safari Web browser could result in a rootkit, a backdoor or other malicious software being installed on the computer without the user noticing anything, experts said.

"This could be really bad," the SANS Internet Storm Center, which tracks network threats, said Tuesday. "Attackers can run shell scripts on your computer remotely just by visiting a malicious Web site."

Apple is developing a patch for the flaw, a company representative told CNET News.com. "We're working on a fix so that this doesn't become something that could affect customers," the representative said, but could not give a delivery date for the update.

Word of the new vulnerability comes after the recent discovery of a Trojan horse and a worm that target Mac users. The operating system had not been in the security crosshairs previously.

The new problem, discovered by Michael Lehn and first reported by Heise Online, lies in the way Mac OS X processes archive files. An attacker could embed malicious code in a ZIP file and host that on a Web site. The file and the embedded code would run when a Mac user visits the site using the Safari browser, experts said.

"Essentially, the operating system is executing commands that come in the metadata for ZIP files," said Alfred Huger, senior director of engineering at Symantec. "That is exacerbated by the problem that Safari will automatically open the file when you encounter it on the Web."

The issue may go beyond archive files, SANS said in updated notes on its Web site. "The attacker doesn't need to send a ZIP archive; the shell script itself can be disguised to practically anything," the note said.

The culprit appears to be the Mac OS Finder, the component of the operating system used to view and organize files, according to the SANS posting. A malicious file can be masked to look innocent--for example, like a JPEG image--yet it will run and execute when opened, SANS said.

This occurs because the operating system assigns an identifying image for the file based on the file extension, but decides which application will handle the file based on file permissions, SANS said. If the file has any executable bits set, it will be run using Terminal, the Unix command line prompt used in Mac OS X, SANS said.

There are no known attacks that take advantage of the flaw, experts said. However, proof-of-concept code that demonstrates the security vulnerability is publicly available online and could be tweaked for use in cyberattacks. "The skill level required to exploit it is very low. Pretty much anyone can do it," Huger said.

In the Windows world, such flaws are often exploited to install spyware or ad-serving software on vulnerable PCs. While such insidious software may be rare for the Mac, there are back doors and rootkits for the operating system, Huger said. "I think you'd likely see those installed with this type of vulnerability," he said.

The vulnerability is rated "extremely critical" by security monitoring company Secunia. Symantec also rates it "fairly high risk," Huger said. "If you have a Mac and use Safari, it is something you should remediate immediately," he said.

Mac OS X users can protect themselves by disabling the "Open safe files after downloading" option in Safari. In addition, users should be cautious when surfing the Web, the Apple representative said. "Apple always advises Mac users to only accept files from vendors and Web sites that they know and trust."

Users of alternative browsers such as Firefox and Camino on the Mac are not exposed to the Web-based attack vector, experts said.
http://news.com.com/OS+X+flaw+exposes+Macs/2100-1002_3-6041685.html?tag=nefd.top

 

Britain is world’s favourite country, say pollsters

But Brits are boring while Yanks are ignorant

By Paul Hales in Jerusalem: Tuesday 21 February 2006, 14:24
POLLSTERS RECKON that there’s no better "brand" than Britain when it comes to being a country.

But despite being reckoned the top place to invest or to visit or indeed to emigrate to, Britain’s notional value in terms of pounds, shillings and cents is less than that of the USA, Japan or Germany. The value of Brand USA is reckoned at $18 trillion whereas Brand UK is in 4th spot in the brand value league table, pinned at $3.5 trillion (£2 trillion).

The Anholt Nation Brands Index (NBI) is complied on results of an Internet survey of some 25,907 people in 35 countries. Tina Louise, European marketing director, for Global Market Insite, Inc, reckons Internet-based research means "we can now collect and measure global opinions about people and places incredibly quickly and accurately." So, evidently if you’re not online your opinions don’t count.

Aside from evaluating the countries in terms of investment or culture, respondents were also asked to assess the inhabitants of the various countries. According to this assessment, UK citizens are considered to be the most polite, most boring and best educated, while the French are seen as the rudest and Americans are the most ignorant and most ambitious.

Here’s the top ten:

1. UK
2. Switzerland
3. Canada
4. Italy
5. Sweden
6. Germany
7. Japan
8. France
9. Australia
10. United States

And here’s the L'INQ to http://www.nationbrandindex.com



http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29824

 

Google admits Desktop security risk
About time they said something about it if you ask me.

Businesses have been warned by research company Gartner that the latest Google Desktop Beta has an "unacceptable security risk," and Google agrees.

- ZDNET.com


Google admits Desktop security risk

By Tom Espiner, ZDNet UK
21 February 2006 08:20 AM
E-Mail Story Printer Friendly Tell Us Your Opinion
Businesses have been warned by research company Gartner that the latest Google Desktop Beta has an "unacceptable security risk," and Google agrees.

On 9 February, Google unveiled Google Desktop 3, a free, downloadable program that includes an option to let users search across multiple computers for files. To do that, the application automatically stores copies of files, for up to a month, on Google servers. From there, copies are transferred to the user's other computers for archiving. The data is encrypted in transmission and while stored on Google servers.

The risk to enterprises, according to Gartner, lies in how this shared information is pooled by Google. The data is transferred to a remote server, where it is stored and can then be shared between users for up to 30 days.

Gartner said in a report on Thursday that the "mere transport (of data) outside the enterprise will represent an unacceptable security risk to many enterprises," as intellectual property could be transported out of the business.

Google said on Monday that it recognised the risk, and recommended that companies take action. "We recognise that this is a big issue for enterprise. Yes, it's a risk, and we understand that businesses may be concerned," said Andy Ku, European marketing manager for Google.

Google confirmed that data was temporarily transported outside of businesses when the Search Across Computers feature was used, and that this represented "as much of a security risk as e-mail does."

"Theoretically any intellectual property can be transferred outside of a company," Ku said. "We understand that there are a lot of security concerns about the Search Across Computers feature, but Google won't hold information unless the user or enterprise opts in (to the feature)."

Google said that security was the concern of individual businesses. "The burden falls on enterprises to look after security issues," Ku said. "Companies can disable the Search Across Computers facility."

Gartner said that sensitive documents may be inadvertently shared by workers, who may not have specialist knowledge of regulatory or security restrictions.

Google said it was unable to comment on the risks posed when individuals share sensitive information. "Some users may, and some users may not be able to," said Ku, adding that companies should follow their own policies.

"At the end of the day, each company should make its own decision. If they are uncomfortable, they shouldn't enable the feature," Ku said. "It's about what a company deems to be best corporate policy."

Gartner has recommended that businesses use Google Desktop for Enterprise, as this allows systems administrators to centrally turn off the Search Across Computers feature, which it said should be "immediately disabled."

Companies "must also evaluate what they are allowing to be indexed, and whether they are comfortable that they can adequately bar the sharing of data with Google's servers," said Gartner.

Google agreed that Google Desktop Enterprise would better mitigate security risks. "If you're given a choice, choose Enterprise," said Ku.

ZDNet UK's Tom Espiner reported from London. For more coverage from ZDNet UK, click here.
E-Mail Story Printer Friendly
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/securi...op_security_risk/0,2000061744,39239366,00.htm

 

Dog poop-the next alternative energy source?

By Reuters
Published: February 22, 2006, 5:06 AM PST
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBack E-mail this story to a friendE-mail View this story formatted for printingPrint

San Francisco, a leader in urban recycling, is preparing to enlist its canine population for a first in the United States: converting dog poop into energy.

Norcal Waste Systems, the city's garbage company, plans to test collection carts and biodegradable bags in a city-center park popular with dog walkers.

A city study found that almost 4 percent of all the garbage picked up at San Francisco homes was from animal waste destined for the city's landfill, Norcal Waste spokesman Robert Reid said. San Francisco has an estimated 120,000 dogs.

"The city asked us to start thinking about a pilot program to recycle the dog poop in order to cut back adding more waste in landfills," Reid said.

Dog feces could be scooped into a methane digester, a device that uses bugs and microorganisms to gobble up the material and emit methane, which would be trapped and burned to power a turbine to make electricity or to heat homes.

Dogs and cats in the United States produce about 10 million tons of waste a year, according to Will Brinton, an environmental scientist and director of Woods End Laboratories in Maine.

"As much as we love them, our pets leave a lot of manure behind them in yards and on the street, and that can be a major source of contamination of groundwater," Brinton said.

German-speaking European cities such as Zurich, Switzerland; Frankfurt and Munich of Germany; and Vienna, Austria, are operating biomass programs to turn waste into gas, he said.

San Francisco runs an aggressive program to recycle bottles, cans, paper and other trash, and it now diverts two-thirds of its garbage away from landfills.

The city's goal is a 75 percent diversion by 2010 and zero new waste in landfills by 2020.
http://news.com.com/Dog+poop--the+n...source/2100-11395_3-6041892.html?tag=nefd.top

 

Patti Santangelo pushes back

p2p news / p2pnet: Jordan Glass is the lawyer acting for Patti Santangelo in her Fight Goliath case in which the New York mother is in effect representing more than 18,000 American men, women and children whom the Big Four record labels are accusing of copyright infringement.

Standing against the multi-billion-dollar labels, the two-person Santangelo team - Patti and Jordan - are doing well and here's a condensed look at what's happening from the legal perspective. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

We pushed back and won
By Jordan Glass

Law is a "zero sum" game, which means that you can win every motion, every objection, every step along the way, but lose at trial (or even win at trial but lose on appeal). Only at the very end of the proceedings can you write (or say) that you've won.

I've experienced courts appearing to bend over backward in favor of one party, only to see that same seemingly "winning" party lose at trial. What appears to be favoritism is really the court ensuring it will not be overturned on appeal; in other words, giving every benefit to the side likely to lose and appeal. Mind you, there is no evidence for this, only experience.

Nonetheless, you can monitor the "attitude" of the proceedings and whether you're making meaningful arguments by what happens along the way. You learn the tenor of the Court (meaning the judge), and the community mindset around your case.

That said, Patti objected to 18 of certain of their discovery demands (called "Requests for Admissions"). The Court didn't rule on one of them, upheld 11, and directed that we answer the other six (how to answer them wasn't before the Court, only whether they had to be answered at all).

I've received mixed responses to the objections (having nothing to do with the Court's determination): one was that these were the same questions that had been used in the RIAA's litigation around the country, and no one had raised any objections before; the second was that no one had taken the matter as far as Patti, so no one had ever objected before.

Patti pushed back.
As to publishing certain information I believed wasn't relevant about the children, Plaintiffs' attorneys agreed for it to be redacted (edited out) from certain documents and the Court ordered the document sealed.

Another small victory, and one which others might seek to explore, especially where children aren't parties to the action.

Remember that many of the decisions and agreements made during this case aren't binding on other cases. I don't intend at all to imply that we've "made law" or that any Court has agreed with Patti's arguments.

I only point out that the Court will listen to the claims and rule on the merits each time they're presented.

In other words, you CAN fight back.

On other discovery portions, Plaintiffs' attorneys have filed papers with the Court seeking to compel certain documents and information. I haven't yet seen those papers, but the next hearing is set for March 3, by which time we'll either be back in Court, or will have settled whatever disagreements we have on the matter.

The process is proceeding in an orderly, if not too-highly expedited, fashion.

The RIAA has been pursuing these cases for a few years now with teams of lawyers; Patti has never been through anything like this and even the defense lawyers only have limited experience with these cases, since most defendants never make it this far into the proceedings.

I'll keep you posted.

(Wednesday 22nd February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7996

 

New Microsoft EC complaint

p2p news / p2pnet: Microsoft, "threatens to deny enterprises and individual consumers real choice," say customers and business rivals in a new unfair competition complaint.

Filed with the European Commission by the European Committee for Interoperable Systems (ECIS), it, "asks the Commission to put an end to the practices that the group says have hemmed in its members," says Reuters, going on:

"The European Commission has been locked in a battle with Microsoft over a 2004 EU court ruling that the software giant abused its dominant market position. Microsoft faces a 2 million euro ($2.4 million) daily fine if the Commission decides it has not complied with that ruling."

The ECIS, whose members include IBM, Nokia Corp and Oracle, said it had, "filed a complaint with the European Commission against a range of Microsoft business practices that threaten to deny enterprises and individual consumers real choice among competing software products," says Dow Jones News Wires.

"It said it wanted to stop Microsoft from bundling new products that would 'reinforce Microsoft's existing monopolies and extend its market dominance into a range of existing and pre-announced future product areas.' It cited Microsoft 'dominant Office productivity applications'."

Also See:
Reuters - Group files new complaint with EU against Microsoft, February 22, 2006
Dow Jones News Wires - Microsoft's rivals file new complaint with European Union, February 22, 2006

(Wednesday 22nd February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7993

 

BitTorrent at SXSW

p2p news / p2pnet: Now it's a corporate application with tight links to Hollywood, BitTorrent is flexing its newly enhanced muscles at the 20th Annual South by Southwest (SXSW) Music and Media Conference and 13th Annual SXSW Film Conference and Festival.

SXSW and BitTorrent say they'll be offering a free music compilation and movie trailer package on both sxsw.com and bittorrent.com.

The compilation from artists playing at SXSW includes songs from The Secret Machines, Giant Squid, Clap Your Hands Say Yeah, Boyskout and, "hundreds of others," promises a statement.

SXSW will also be offering a collection of movie trailers from this year's schedule of SXSW Films, which includes more than 50 world premieres, it says.

The conference is slated to run between March 15 and 19 in Austin, Texas.

(Wednesday 22nd February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7995

 

Wireless broadband tunes in to TV spectrum

2/21/2006 6:27:19 PM, by Nate Anderson

Last-mile wireless Internet access is really, truly coming—but when it gets here, where's it going to go? We reported last month that the spectrum currently used for over-the-air analog television broadcasts would not be freed up for other uses until the transition to digital signals is completed in 2009. Now it appears that the government, stung by the sad state of broadband penetration in the US, might allow technologies such as WiMax unlicensed use of so-called "white spaces" in the spectrum. These white spaces are basically dead air, parts of the spectrum on which no station currently transmits, and they exist even in heavily congested urban areas (San Franciso, for instance, has six channels vacant, and it's one of the most congested places). Two new bills want to open up this coveted spectrum within months instead of years.

First up is the Wireless Innovation Act (rather arbitrarily shortened to the WINN Act, since no one can be against winning, can they?) introduced by Senators George Allen (R-VA) and John Kerry (D-MA). The bill directs the FCC to set up rules that would enable unlicensed use of the spectrum between 54Mhz and 698Mhz by the end of the year. The goal of the WINN Act is to increase broadband use rates, especially in rural areas, by making it easier to provide more kinds of Internet service. Also, it helps kids and hurts terrorists.

"In communities large and small, broadband access connects mothers to children, students to innovative new learning technologies and first responders to citizens in times of crisis," said Kerry in a statement. "Making this technology available in all corners of our country is good for our families, demonstrates the spirit of American innovation and promotes our success in the global economy."

The competing American Broadband for Communities Act (ABC Act) was introduced by Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) and looks quite similar to the WINN Act, but with different open frequencies. It also directs the FCC to open up "any unused broadcast television spectrum in the band between 72 and 698 megaHertz, inclusive, other than spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 megaHertz, inclusive," which "may be used by unlicensed devices, including wireless broadband devices."

The bills appear to enjoy broad bipartisan support, which suggests that we could see legislative action fairly soon. Open television spectrum has long been considered a prize by wireless device makers, but many people thought that the government would hold out until 2009, clear the analog TV stations out of the way, and then auction off the spectrum to the highest bidders. If large numbers of devices are certified for use on unlicensed spectrum, though, this appears much less likely, and may indicate that the whole band will be less regulated than previously thought. The lower spectrum used for TV is considered unusually good because it is better able to pass through walls than higher frequencies, signal coverage is better, and it's cheaper to build the equipment. Of course, devices that operate in this band are basically non-existent, since it was presumed to be off-limits, and it will take some time before anything concrete comes to market.

In other wireless news, Chicago has just announced its plan to join the Mile High Municipal Wi-Fi Club, alongside other cities like Philadelphia and San Francisco. No details have been announced about pricing, but the service could be operational in 2007 and is expected to blanket the entire city. AT&T is surprisingly not opposed to the idea, mainly because the Chicago system won't function as a competitor to the telco (it may in fact put more money in Ma Bell's pocket). Chicago is hoping to build the system without putting out much money, so they plan to partner with other broadband providers to actually deliver the service.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060221-6232.html

 

Judge to Google: Some thumbnails are illegal

2/22/2006 12:19:52 PM, by Nate Anderson

Google, not generally used to losing in court, now finds itself on the receiving end of a preliminary injunction over image search results. The case began back in 2004 when Perfect 10, publisher of the "the world's most beautiful natural women," sued both Amazon (targeting their A9 subsidiary) and Google for copyright infringement. At issue was the fact that both search engines displayed thumbnail images of Perfect 10's natural women. The company felt that this was making it more difficult to extract US$25.50 a month from its customers, and sued.

Google and Amazon disagreed, citing the well known Kelly v. Arriba Soft case which found that the creation of thumbnails by a search engine was legal, even if the material was copyrighted, because they were 1) small and 2) had a "transformative" use. A judge has decided (PDF) that this argument isn't good enough for Google (the Amazon decision is coming separately), in part because Google makes money from pirate sites that have ripped off Perfect 10's pictures and now display them as their own. Their use of Perfect 10's copyrighted images indirectly brings money to Google because they are also enrolled in AdSense, so Perfect 10 argues that Google's use of these thumbnails cannot be simply "transformative." The judge agreed.

"But unlike Arriba, Google offers and derives commercial benefit from its AdSense program," writes the judge on p. 26 of his decision. "If third-party web sites that contain infringing copies of P10 photographs are also AdSense partners, Google will serve advertisements on those sites and split the revenue generated from users who click on the Google-served advertisements. Google counters that its AdSense Program Policies prohibit a web site from registering as an AdSense partner if the site's web pages contain images that appear in Google Image Search results... However, Google has not presented any information regarding the extent to which this purported policy is enforced. Nor has it provided examples of AdSense partners who were terminated because of violations of this policy... AdSense unquestionably makes Google's use of thumbnails on its image search far more commercial than Arriba's use."

Further complicating the issue is the fact that Perfect 10 provides its images to mobile phone users for a fee. But Google's image search also works with mobile phones, and allows users to view thumbnails from Perfect 10 that are all but indistinguishable from the mobile phone images that Perfect 10 is trying to sell. Given Perfect 10's business model, the judge ruled that Google's thumbnails are indeed "transformative," but they are also "consumptive."

"Google's use of thumbnails to simplify and expedite accessed information is transformative of P10's use of reduced-size images to entertain. But that does not end the analysis, because Google's use is simultaneously consumptive as well" (p. 29).

The EFF, in a friend of the court brief, argued that Google's use was purely transformative and us should fall under the category of "fair use." "Here, every reproduction and display performed by a Google computer is a necessary step to achieving a legitimate public purpose," says the brief in language that makes searching for porn sound almost noble. The judge, while acknowledging the great public benefit provided by search engines like Google, ruled that public benefit alone cannot trump a legitimate copyright claim. He has given the parties until March 8 to work out the language for a narrow injunction that would prevent Google from displaying thumbnails of Perfect 10's images, but he declined to prevent Google from linking to sites that may contain infringing content. Google has vowed to appeal the decision, and claims that even if the injunction stands, it will have no effect on the vast majority of Google's image search functionality. We'll have to wait until the injunction is formulated to see how this will actually work.

As Google has branched out from its core search business into book search, image search, and news search, it has found itself the repeated target of lawsuits from organizations who believe that their copyrighted material is simply being used to put money in Google's coffers. Without much explicit guidance from Congress on the application of copyright and fair use exemptions to the Internet to digital media, the boundary lines are increasingly being hammered out in court. Expect the trend to continue as the search engine giant continues its quest to organize all the world's information.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060222-6234.html

 

AOL raising dial-up prices to spur broadband

2/22/2006 11:44:04 AM, by Ken "Caesar" Fisher

AOL's Internet business isn't exactly cutting edge, but as the number one provider of dial-up Internet access in the United States, the company's approach to broadband has proven to be instructive for those watching the slow transition away from ye olde dial-uppe. While it may be quite shocking to think of millions of households still dialing up an ISP to get online these days, broadband access has yet to reach the low-low price of good old fashioned modulator-demodulator access. While some DSL companies have toyed with dirt-cheap rates (US$15/month access in some instances), those rates are typically promotional and time-limited. Most dial-up users remain committed to their modems while DSL companies try to find a way to lure customers away from them.

AOL is planning a novel approach. Rather than try to roll out cheaper DSL service (re-branded or otherwise), they're going to raise their unlimited dial-up rates starting in March. That's right: most of 20 million AOL dial-up users are going to see their rates increase by $2 per month, as the company prepares to charge the same amount for dial-up service as they do for DSL. The company hopes that when users see that AOL's dial-up and re-branded DSL products are both $25.90, customers will move to the latter. What they may find, however, is that many will move to back-up options; limited dial-up access is still available (10 hours for $14.95), and the company will continue discount pricing for users who commit to 12 months of service (not to mention the competition). It's a gutsy move: much like the Spanish Inquisition, no one expects a rate hike on dial-up services.

"We're doing this because a majority of AOL members will be able to get high-speed connections and access the AOL service for this new price," spokeswoman Anne Bentley said Tuesday. "Hopefully it's an encouragement for them to get high-speed connections."

AOL has transitioned from a dial-up content provider to multi-pronged media company, but it has had a hard fight every step of the way. In 2004 the company started to make some of its premium content available to all of the 'net's denizens, and since that time it has become increasingly clear that AOL's future lays in content. The company needs its subscribers, however, and they hope that recent packaging deals with AT&T, Bell South, and others will effectively "outsource" the responsibility for managing DSL service without "outsourcing" all of their revenues related to that business.

For AOL, it's a major risk. Some 75 percent of the company's traditional customers are still on dial-up, and just about everyone expects those very same customers to make the leap to broadband sooner or later. The company has already lost more than 6 million subscribers since the dot-bomb era, and AOL is keenly aware that users who get a taste for the 'net sans AOL's packaging tend to never come back to the AOL fold. The plan could unwittingly send their customers into the arms of their competitors.

Why risk driving users away? Dial-up access isn't necessarily cheap to maintain. Local access numbers, fidgety equipment, and user support options are all in the mix. The company would love to be rid of dial-up altogether. At the same time, AOL hopes to retain users by getting them hooked on the same AOL content that they have been receiving for years. The problem is that many of these offerings are becoming decidedly broadband in nature. AOL's forthcoming In2TV service, for instance, will need broadband to be of any use. While the company will make In2TV available to non-subscribers, AOL has seen success in the past promoting its own non-premium services to its users.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060222-6233.html

 

The anti-copy or print CD-R by Kodia
A company called Kodia launches a special CD-R in Korea that allows you to enter a number of protection parameters before the burning process. These protections disable the possibility to print a file stored onto the CD, or copy files to a computer, or even the impossibility to copy the CD. A very interesting system for the RIAA, but hopefully it's a bit better implemented than the SonyBMG CD's in the US.

 

Danish ISPs as Big Music cops

p2p news / p2pnet: A court ruling in Denmark could mean local ISPs will be forced to act as Big Four record label cops.

They'll have to close the accounts of customers proved to have been infringing Big Fou copyrights, says the IFPI (International Federation of Phonographic Industry).

A Danish Supreme Court ruling will, "oblige TDC, and other ISPs, to act immediately when they are notified that one of their customers is using their internet account to infringe copyright," it says, continuing:

"In the event of non-compliance, copyright owners will be able to ask the court for an injunction against the service provider."

At the moment, alleged infringers face legal action only after due process - in other words, only once the Big Four have been through the courts to obtain their names and addresses.

(Wednesday 22nd February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/8002

 

Sex with a partner is 400% better

* 22 February 2006
* From New Scientist Print Edition

Printable version Email to a friend RSS Feed

LOVERS know only too well that men usually need a "recovery period" after orgasm, and that sexual intercourse with orgasm is more satisfying than an orgasm from masturbation alone. Now scientists think the two phenomena might be linked.

Following orgasm, the hormone prolactin is released into the bloodstream in both men and women. The hormone makes us feel satiated by countering the effect of dopamine, which is released during sexual arousal.

Stuart Brody of the University of Paisley, UK, and Tillmann Krüger of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, measured blood prolactin levels in male and female volunteers who watched erotic films before engaging in masturbation or sexual intercourse to orgasm in the laboratory.

Surprisingly, after orgasm from sexual intercourse, the increase in blood prolactin levels is 400 per cent higher in both sexes compared with after orgasm from masturbation (Biological Psychology, vol 71, p 312).

This explains why orgasm from intercourse is more satisfying than masturbation, says Brody. Since elevated levels of prolactin have been linked to erectile dysfunction, this may also explain why most men need a recovery period after sex.
From issue 2540 of New Scientist magazine, 22 February 2006, page 21
Printable version Email to a friend RSS Feed
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18925405.900&feedId=online-news_rss20

 

Sonic CinePlayer for playback and web-delivery of contentPosted by Dan Bell on 22 February 2006 - 20:41 - Source: Sonic

The following text is a complete press release, unmodified by CD Freaks. If you don't want to view these kind of news posting you can disable them in your preferences page once logged in. Please send your press releases to news@cdfreaks.com

Sonic Releases New CinePlayer Platform for Playback and Web-delivery of Content

Enables Delivery of Dynamic Entertainment Experiences to Consumers via Set-top Devices and Desktop PCs

February 22, 2006 — Sonic Solutions® (NASDAQ: SNIC), the leader in digital media software, today released the CinePlayer® Platform, a comprehensive digital media playback “engine” to support virtually any digital media type – music, photos, videos, and web-delivered interactive content. The CinePlayer Platform has two key advantages: first, it allows Sonic’s personal computer and consumer electronics partners to tailor a wide variety of digital media offerings based on a common underlying playback engine; this makes it easier and more cost effective for them to test, release and revise their products. Second, the CinePlayer Platform combines playback from DVDs (including Blu-ray disc and HD DVD) with web-delivered content such as advertising, merchandising promotions and bonus material; this allows for attractive new models of advertising, promotion and content distribution. The CinePlayer Platform ships in key OEM channels later this week.

“With its versatile feature set, the CinePlayer Platform is a one-stop shop for OEMs configuring digital home entertainment solutions,” said Richard Doherty, research director of the Envisioneering Group. “From playing today’s most popular media formats with enhanced interactivity to supporting next-generation media formats such as Blu-ray Disc and HD DVD, the CinePlayer Platform is essentially a future-proof, full featured interactive media platform.”

The CinePlayer Platform builds upon Sonic’s expertise as the leading provider of technologies for digital media creation, management, and enjoyment from Hollywood to home. The CinePlayer Platform incorporates Sonic’s InterActual®-enhanced DVD technology which has been used by Hollywood studios to provide consumers with seamless access to on-disc and online bonus interactive content. Additionally, the CinePlayer Platform has been architected to enable new entertainment services such as Sonic’s recently announced DVD on Demand™ solution for the electronic sell-through of movies and television content, as well as to support next-generation High Definition formats, Blu-ray Disc and HD-DVD.

“The CinePlayer Platform offers a scalable architecture to allow our content and technology partners to keep pace with the evolving digital home entertainment market and changing needs of the consumer,” said Mark Ely, Sonic’s executive vice president of strategy. “Not only will the platform adapt as new formats and capabilities emerge, but it will also present our partners with a broad range of new opportunities to drive revenue with innovative entertainment-based programs and services.”

About Sonic Solutions
Sonic Solutions (NASDAQ : SNIC; http://www.sonic.co.uk) is the leader in digital media software, providing a broad range of interoperable, platform-independent software tools and applications for creative professionals, business and home users, and technology partners. Sonic's products range from advanced DVD authoring systems and interactive content delivery technologies used to produce the majority of Hollywood DVD film releases, to the award-winning Roxio®-branded CD and DVD creation, playback and backup solutions that have become the premier choice for consumers, prosumers and business users worldwide.

Sonic products are globally available from major retailers, online at Sonic.com and Roxio.com, and are bundled with PCs, after-market drives and consumer electronic devices. Sonic's digital media creation engine is the de facto standard and has been licensed by major software and hardware manufacturers, including Adobe, Microsoft, Scientific-Atlanta, Sony, and many others. Sonic Solutions is headquartered in Marin County, California.

Sonic, the Sonic logo, Sonic Solutions, Roxio, CinePlayer, and InterActual are trademarks or registered trademarks of Sonic Solutions or its subsidiaries in the United States and/or other countries. All other company or product names are trademarks of their respective owners and, in some cases, are used by Sonic Solutions under license. Specifications, pricing and delivery schedules are subject to change without notice.
http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/13106

THIS WAS MY LAST NEW'S POST IN THIS THREAD,AS NO ONE WAS READING WHAT I POSTED
CHEERS

 

RIAA 'predatory litigation tactics''

p2p news / p2pnet: Fifteen-year-old Elisa Greubel made headlines when she contacted Nettwerk music artist MC Lars to say she identified with 'Download This Song,' a track from his then latest release.

That was because the Big Four record labels, Warner Music, Vivendi Universal, EMI and Sony BMG, were trying extort a lot of money from her father, David, for supposedly sharing nine copyrighted songs online.

MC Lars passed Elisa's message to Canada's Terry McBride, who runs Nettwerk, and he decided, "Suing music fans isn't the solution, it’s the problem," as he told p2pnet in a recent Q&A.

So he promised to pick up the Greubel's legal bill.

Now a new motion has been made to have a copyright infringement case brought by the Big Four's RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) has been made in Texas, says Recording Industry vs The People.

In it, Greubel states:

* The RIAA's attempt to recover $750 per song, while its actual damages are only 99 cents per song, is unconstitutional;
* Since 2003 the RIAA has been actively engaged in "extortive and predatory litigation tactics" and misused the Courts to "create a veil of fear designed to frighten average consumers into paying thousands of dollars in settlements to avoid prolonged litigation";
* The RIAA's pleadings are "smoke and mirrors";
* The complaint lacks sufficient specificity;
* Tthe "distribution right" upon which the RIAA vaguely relies does not apply to electronic transmissions; and
* Even if it did, the mere act of making sound recordings available online does not constitute an actionable infringement.


Go here for the full document.

And definitely stay tuned.

Also See:
recent Q&A - p2pnet talks to Nettwerk Music, February 14, 2006
Recording Industry vs The People - Motion to Dismiss Made in Texas in Arista v. Greubel, February 26, 2005

(Monday 27th February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/8054

Sunday, February 26, 2006

Motion to Dismiss Made in Texas in Arista v. Greubel

A new dismissal motion has been made, this time in Texas, in Arista Records v. Greubel, in the United States District Court, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division.

In his motion papers Mr. Greubel argues that:

-the RIAA's attempt to recover $750 per song, while its actual damages are only 99 cents per song, is unconstitutional;

-since 2003 the RIAA has been actively engaged in "extortive and predatory litigation tactics" and misused the Courts to "create a veil of fear designed to frighten average consumers into paying thousands of dollars in settlements to avoid prolonged litigation";

-the RIAA's pleadings are "smoke and mirrors";

-the complaint lacks sufficient specificity;

-the "distribution right" upon which the RIAA vaguely relies does not apply to electronic transmissions; and

-even if it did, the mere act of making sound recordings available online does not constitute an actionable infringement.

Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Published at Internet Law & Regulation)

Keywords: copyright download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Posted by Ray Beckerman @ 2/26/2006 05:45:00 PM Link to this Post (Will change if updated in subsequent month)
Comments:
Ray what do you think about the motion to dismiss? does it make sense to you? do you think the judge would find it made sense and would dismiss it?

It makes sense to me however, I have noticed that the judges seem reluctant to ever dismiss these cases under any circumstances, although if one judge does then it could make the RIAA think twice next time.
# posted by Oli : 6:37 PM

Dear oli,

I thought it was excellent.

It absolutely does make sense, and if the judge rules correctly, it will be granted, and the case thrown out.

There is only one dismissal motion of which I am aware that has been ruled on to date, so I don't see how you can have discerned a trend yet.

There is a long and clearcut tradition of what constitutes proper pleading of a copyright infringement case, and the RIAA's boilerplate -- identical in about 19,000 cases -- is not it.

Best regards,

Ray
# posted by Ray Beckerman : 6:58 PM

There was also a dismissal motion in BMG v. Conklin, in Houston, but that one doesn't really count -- it was a litigant who didn't have a lawyer, didn't fully brief the motion. Also the judge didn't say what the ruling was based on.
# posted by Ray Beckerman : 6:59 PM

Sorry my statement wasn't based on fact it was more a broad sweeping "feeling" that the system is against everyone but the recording industry!

It is in fact good to know that what I thought was the case it not! so thanks for pointing that out! But I was also thinking of your dismissal motion with the Santangelo case - but maybe I am confused with the type of different motions.

I wonder what the RIAA's lawyers would have to say about the motion and if it is dismissed would that mean that everycase that was brought could and should be dismissed by a precedent being set? and would there be a way to appeal any decision that the court made on the motion for either party?
# posted by Oli : 7:25 PM

The Santangelo motion is the one dismissal motion I was referring to.

There are several others in the pipleline, but we don't know their outcome yet: Maverick v. Goldshteyn, Elektra v. Barker, Arista v. Greubel. There's also one pending in Atlantic v. Andersen and another pending in Minnesota.
# posted by Ray Beckerman : 11:07 AM

As to what's binding, it's only binding if it's from an appeals court, and then it's binding on every district court within its purview. A decision from a circuit court is binding on every district court within that circuit. If the US Supreme Court says it, then it's binding on all the federal courts.

If, e.g., the motion in Elektra v. Barker is granted.... the RIAA appeals... the Second Circuit affirms... the US Supreme Court denies cert.... then the 2d Cir. decision will be binding on every district court in the 2d Cir. If on the other hand the US Sup. Ct. granted cert, and affirmed, then it would be the law.
# posted by Ray Beckerman : 11:11 AM

Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

# RSS Feed For This Site


Ty Rogers and Ray Beckerman.

We are lawyers in New York City. We practice law at Beldock Levine & Hoffman LLP.

Through the Electronic Frontier Foundation we and our firm have undertaken to represent people in our area who have been sued by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) for having computers whose internet accounts were used to open up peer-to-peer file sharing accounts.

We find these cases to be oppressive and unfair, as large multinational corporations gang up, in a cartel, to misuse the federal courts and sue ordinary working people for thousands of dollars.

We have set up this blog in order to collect evidence and input about these oppressive lawsuits.

We hope you will find it useful.

If you have information relating to the music industry litigation which you feel would be appropriate for publication here, please send it to musiclitigation@earthlink.net

Thank you.

Sincerely yours,

-Ray Beckerman
-Morlan Ty Rogers
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2006/02/motion-to-dismiss-made-in-texas-in.html

p2pnet talks to Nettwerk Music

p2p news / p2pnet: Canada's Nettwerk Music Group, based in Vancouver on the British Columbia mainland, manages some of North America’s best-known artists, including Sarah McLachlan and Avril Lavigne. It's also a member of the Big Four record label cartel's RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America).

But that doesn't mean the man who runs it, Terry McBride, is a fool. To the contrary, in fact, and like p2pnet, based on Vancouver Island in BC, he's doing his best to help an American family which is being pilloried by the RIAA.

In August, 2005, the RIAA, subpoenaed David Greubel for alleged file sharing, accusing him of having 600 suspect music files on the family computer, but targeting only nine specific songs.

Nettwerk got into it when 15 year-old Elisa Greubel contacted MC Lars, a Nettwerk artist, to say she identified with 'Download This Song,' a track from MC Lars' latest release.

"My family is one of many seemingly randomly chosen families to be sued by the RIAA," Emily emailed MC Lars. "No fun. You can't fight them, trying could possibly cost us millions.

"The line 'they sue little kids downloading hit songs', basically sums a lot of the whole thing up."

But, "Suing music fans isn't the solution, it’s the problem,” says McBride.

He answered a few questions for p2pnet during which he said although he's behind the Greubels, "it's not about winning the case: it's about stopping all the litigation. Period. That's my focus."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

p2pnet: How far are you willing to go with this?

McBride: As far as we need to in order to save the music business from itself.

p2pnet: Have you had any feedback from any of the artists you represent other than MC Lars?

McBride: Yes ... all supportive. All have gotten behind this.

p2pnet: Bob Lefsetz says, " Nettwerk manages such international superstars as Sarah McLachlan, Avri Lavigne and Dido. Along with middle tier acts like the aforementioned Barenaked Ladies, Sum 41 and Jars of Clay. And DEVELOPING acts like Brand New. Isn't this JUST the kind of guy who should be lining up behind Mitch Bainwol and the RIAA?

McBride: Why? .... we're members of the RIAA, but that doesn't mean that I can't disagree with them, which on this subject I do

Lefsetz ...... I mean Terry McBride is IN BED with the major labels. Doesn't Nettwerk function as the A&R for Sony BMG in Canada now??

McBride: Yes. We have and A&R deal to help Artists who want to be on a major label.

p2pnet: Lefsetz also says, "But Terry McBride is drawing the line. Because Terry McBride knows it's about fans, and careers, and what the RIAA is doing is eviscerating both. The fans are the present and the future ... it's been that way for decades, as has the sharing of music, its essential to the fabric." Is that how it is?

McBride: We love what we do. We're creative people with infinite imaginations. Litigation is destructive and has no place in the world.

p2pnet: Have any other production company people said they'd do the same as you?

McBride: Martin Mills from Beggar's in the UK.

p2pnet: What's your personal feeling about p2p, file sharing and the online music scene?

McBride: I think p2p should be a vibrant part of the on-line music scene, not bastardized.

p2pnet: Do you agree that $1 and up is a fair price for a download?

McBride: No higher than $1.

p2pnet: How do you think the labels should be dealing with Elisa and others like her?

McBride: The Labels should stop these actions.

p2pnet: Do you have a message for Mitch Bainwol and his colleagues?

McBride: Yes. Stop litigating. You're ruining my artists' futures.

(Tuesday 14th February 2006)

 

Can file-swappers be sued as "distributors"?

2/28/2006 9:34:22 AM, by Nate Anderson

Denise Barker is one of the few file-swappers sued by the RIAA who has taken her fight to court. Elektra v. Barker is an interesting case for several reasons, including the fact that the RIAA wants to argue that simply making files available (even if they're not actually downloaded) constitutes infringement. The EFF has just weighed in on the case by filing an amicus brief with the court. Rather than address all the issues raised by the case, the brief tries instead to make only a single point: sharing music files does not infringe the "distribution right" granted to copyright holders.

Under US law, copyright owners are the only ones authorized "to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending." The EFF argues (PDF) that such "copies or phonorecords" only include physical objects such as cassettes, CDs, or a user's hard drive.

When defining the right, Congress deliberately chose not to define the right expansively as a right to distribute the copyrighted work, but instead limited it to encompass only the distribution of copies or phonorecords of the work. ... This distinction is critical, as the Copyright Act defines both "copies" and "phonorecords" as "material objects" in which copyrighted works are fixed.

The issue is important because the RIAA has generally sued file-swappers both for violating the music labels' right of reproduction and their right of distribution. In their brief, the EFF fully grants that the labels can sue file-swappers for illicit reproduction, but they argue that no distribution is actually taking place. Only if a user burned the songs onto a CD and sent it to the other party could he be accused of distribution, in their view.

It sounds like an arcane point, especially since it does not bear on the issue of whether file-swappers are guilty of breaking the law, but it's important because it shows the RIAA trying to extend the idea of "distribution rights" into the digital domain without explicit legal authorization from Congress. The goal, in the EFF's view, is simply to grab power.

"Why does it matter? If transmission plus reproduction equals distribution, then suddenly lots of people start looking like distributors. When XM and Sirius sell you a receiver that can record their broadcasts, or Comcast provides DVRs to subscribers, they might find themselves running afoul of this new, expanded "distribution right." This, in turn, would give the movie and music industries another weapon in their fight against new technologies."

The RIAA has now sued nearly 20,000 people, and in many of those cases has made the claim that both reproduction and distribution were taking place. Since most cases are settled without going to court, the EFF is worried that the distribution claim is going unchallenged, and they are now doing their best to stop it. This probably won't help Ms. Barker much, as she stills stands accused of reproducing copyrighted files, but it may curtail the use of one of the RIAA's favored legal weapons.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060228-6281.html

 

Seagate releases video surveillance hard drives

You are on candid magnetic material

By INQUIRER staff: Tuesday 28 February 2006, 14:27
HARD DRIVE maker Seagate said it will release three units designed specifically for the video surveillance market this April.

The 160GB, 250GB and 500GB SV35 drives will allow for up to 23 days of continuous recording, it claimed.

And Seagate said video surveillance systems are rapidly shifting from tape to hard drive systems, with software helping to analyse high resolution images.

Special features of the SV35 series include low start up current and realtime power saving. µ
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29964

 

How to bypass your BIOS Password
This is a keeper. I run into this every once in a while and I always ended up pulling the battery.

- Basic BIOS password crack



Basic BIOS password crack - works 9.9 times out of ten
This is a password hack but it clears the BIOS such that the next time you start the PC, the CMOS does not ask for any password. Now if you are able to bring the DOS prompt up, then you will be able to change the BIOS setting to the default. To clear the CMOS do the following:
Get DOS prompt and type:
DEBUG hit enter
-o 70 2e hit enter
-o 71 ff hit enter
-q hit enter
exit hit enter
Restart the computer. It works on most versions of the AWARD BIOS.

Basic BIOS password crack - works 9.9 times out of ten
This is a password hack but it clears the BIOS such that the next time you start the PC, the CMOS does not ask for any password. Now if you are able to bring the DOS prompt up, then you will be able to change the BIOS setting to the default. To clear the CMOS do the following:
Get DOS prompt and type:
DEBUG hit enter
-o 70 2e hit enter
-o 71 ff hit enter
-q hit enter
exit hit enter
Restart the computer. It works on most versions of the AWARD BIOS.

Accessing information on the hard disk

When you turn on the host machine, enter the CMOS setup menu (usually you have to press F2, or DEL, or CTRL+ALT+S during the boot sequence) and go to STANDARD CMOS SETUP, and set the channel to which you have put the hard disk as TYPE=Auto, MODE=AUTO, then SAVE & EXIT SETUP. Now you have access to the hard disk.


Standard BIOS backdoor passwords
The first, less invasive, attempt to bypass a BIOS password is to try on of these standard manufacturer's backdoor passwords:
AWARD BIOS
AWARD SW, AWARD_SW, Award SW, AWARD PW, _award, awkward, J64, j256, j262, j332, j322, 01322222, 589589, 589721, 595595, 598598, HLT, SER, SKY_FOX, aLLy, aLLY, Condo, CONCAT, TTPTHA, aPAf, HLT, KDD, ZBAAACA, ZAAADA, ZJAAADC, djonet, %øåñòü ïpîáåëîâ%, %äåâÿòü ïpîáåëîâ%
AMI BIOS
AMI, A.M.I., AMI SW, AMI_SW, BIOS, PASSWORD, HEWITT RAND, Oder
Other passwords you may try (for AMI/AWARD or other BIOSes)
LKWPETER, lkwpeter, BIOSTAR, biostar, BIOSSTAR, biosstar, ALFAROME, Syxz, Wodj
Note that the key associated to "_" in the US keyboard corresponds to "?" in some European keyboards (such as Italian and German ones), so -- for example -- you should type AWARD?SW when using those keyboards. Also remember that passwords are Case Sensitive. The last two passwords in the AWARD BIOS list are in Russian.

Flashing BIOS via software
If you have access to the computer when it's turned on, you could try one of those programs that remove the password from the BIOS, by invalidating its memory.
However, it might happen you don't have one of those programs when you have access to the computer, so you'd better learn how to do manually what they do. You can reset the BIOS to its default values using the MS-DOS tool DEBUG (type DEBUG at the command prompt. You'd better do it in pure MS-DOS mode, not from a MS-DOS shell window in Windows). Once you are in the debug environment enter the following commands:
AMI/AWARD BIOS
O 70 17
O 71 17
Q
PHOENIX BIOS
O 70 FF
O 71 17
Q
GENERIC
Invalidates CMOS RAM.
Should work on all AT motherboards
(XT motherboards don't have CMOS)
O 70 2E
O 71 FF
Q
Note that the first letter is a "O" not the number "0". The numbers which follow are two bytes in hex format.

Flashing BIOS via hardware
If you can't access the computer when it's on, and the standard backdoor passwords didn't work, you'll have to flash the BIOS via hardware. Please read the important notes at the end of this section before to try any of these methods.

Using the jumpers
The canonical way to flash the BIOS via hardware is to plug, unplug, or switch a jumper on the motherboard (for "switching a jumper" I mean that you find a jumper that joins the central pin and a side pin of a group of three pins, you should then unplug the jumper and then plug it to the central pin and to the pin on the opposite side, so if the jumper is normally on position 1-2, you have to put it on position 2-3, or vice versa). This jumper is not always located near to the BIOS, but could be anywhere on the motherboard.

To find the correct jumper you should read the motherboard's manual.
Once you've located the correct jumper, switch it (or plug or unplug it, depending from what the manual says) while the computer is turned OFF. Wait a couple of seconds then put the jumper back to its original position. In some motherboards it may happen that the computer will automatically turn itself on, after flashing the BIOS. In this case, turn it off, and put the jumper back to its original position, then turn it on again. Other motherboards require you turn the computer on for a few seconds to flash the BIOS.

If you don't have the motherboard's manual, you'll have to "brute force" it... trying out all the jumpers. In this case, try first the isolated ones (not in a group), the ones near to the BIOS, and the ones you can switch (as I explained before). If all them fail, try all the others. However, you must modify the status of only one jumper per attempt, otherwise you could damage the motherboard (since you don't know what the jumper you modified is actually meant for). If the password request screen still appear, try another one.

If after flashing the BIOS, the computer won't boot when you turn it on, turn it off, and wait some seconds before to retry.

Removing the battery
If you can't find the jumper to flash the BIOS or if such jumper doesn't exist, you can remove the battery that keeps the BIOS memory alive. It's a button-size battery somewhere on the motherboard (on elder computers the battery could be a small, typically blue, cylinder soldered to the motherboard, but usually has a jumper on its side to disconnect it, otherwise you'll have to unsolder it and then solder it back). Take it away for 15-30 minutes or more, then put it back and the data contained into the BIOS memory should be volatilized. I'd suggest you to remove it for about one hour to be sure, because if you put it back when the data aren't erased yet you'll have to wait more time, as you've never removed it. If at first it doesn't work, try to remove the battery overnight.

Important note: in laptop and notebooks you don't have to remove the computer's power batteries (which would be useless), but you should open your computer and remove the CMOS battery from the motherboard.
Short-circuiting the chip
Another way to clear the CMOS RAM is to reset it by short circuiting two pins of the BIOS chip for a few seconds. You can do that with a small piece of electric wire or with a bent paper clip. Always make sure that the computer is turned OFF before to try this operation.
Here is a list of EPROM chips that are commonly used in the BIOS industry. You may find similar chips with different names if they are compatible chips made by another brand. If you find the BIOS chip you are working on matches with one of the following you can try to short-circuit the appropriate pins. Be careful, because this operation may damage the chip.
CHIPS P82C206 (square)
Short together pins 12 and 32 (the first and the last pins on the bottom edge of the chip) or pins 74 and 75 (the two pins on the upper left corner).
gnd
74
|__________________
5v 75--| |
| |
| |
| CHIPS |
1 * | |
| P82C206 |
| |
| |
|___________________|
| |
| gnd | 5v
12 32
OPTi F82C206 (rectangular)
Short together pins 3 and 26 (third pin from left side and fifth pin from right side on the bottom edge).
80 51
|______________|
81 -| |- 50
| |
| |
| OPTi |
| |
| F82C206 |
| |
100-|________________|-31
|| | |
1 || | | 30
3 26

Dallas DS1287, DS1287A
Benchmarq bp3287MT, bq3287AMT
The Dallas DS1287 and DS1287A, and the compatible Benchmarq bp3287MT and bq3287AMT chips have a built-in battery. This battery should last up to ten years. Any motherboard using these chips should not have an additional battery (this means you can't flash the BIOS by removing a battery). When the battery fails, the RTC chip would be replaced.
CMOS RAM can be cleared on the 1287A and 3287AMT chips by shorting pins 12 and 21.
The 1287 (and 3287MT) differ from the 1287A in that the CMOS RAM can't be cleared. If there is a problem such as a forgotten password, the chip must be replaced. (In this case it is recommended to replace the 1287 with a 1287A). Also the Dallas 12887 and 12887A are similar but contain twice as much CMOS RAM storage.
__________
1 -| * U |- 24 5v
2 -| |- 23
3 -| |- 22
4 -| |- 21 RCL (RAM Clear)
5 -| |- 20
6 -| |- 19
7 -| |- 18
8 -| |- 17
9 -| |- 16
10 -| |- 15
11 -| |- 14
gnd 12 -|__________|- 13

NOTE: Although these are 24-pin chips,
the Dallas chips may be missing 5 pins,
these are unused pins.
Most chips have unused pins,
though usually they are still present.

Dallas DS12885S
Benchmarq bq3258S
Hitachi HD146818AP
Samsung KS82C6818A
This is a rectangular 24-pin DIP chip, usually in a socket. The number on the chip should end in 6818.
Although this chip is pin-compatible with the Dallas 1287/1287A, there is no built-in battery.
Short together pins 12 and 24.
5v
24 20 13
|___________|____________________|
| |
| DALLAS |
|> |
| DS12885S |
| |
|__________________________________|
| |
1 12
gnd

Motorola MC146818AP
Short pins 12 and 24. These are the pins on diagonally opposite corners - lower left and upper right. You might also try pins 12 and 20.
__________
1 -| * U |- 24 5v
2 -| |- 23
3 -| |- 22
4 -| |- 21
5 -| |- 20
6 -| |- 19
7 -| |- 18
8 -| |- 17
9 -| |- 16
10 -| |- 15
11 -| |- 14
gnd 12 -|__________|- 13

Replacing the chip
If nothing works, you could replace the existing BIOS chip with a new one you can buy from your specialized electronic shop or your computer supplier. It's a quick operation if the chip is inserted on a base and not soldered to the motherboard, otherwise you'll have to unsolder it and then put the new one. In this case would be more convenient to solder a base on which you'll then plug the new chip, in the eventuality that you'll have to change it again. If you can't find the BIOS chip specifically made for your motherboard, you should buy one of the same type (probably one of the ones shown above) and look in your motherboard manufacturer's website to see if there's the BIOS image to download. Then you should copy that image on the chip you bought with an EPROM programmer.

Important
Whether is the method you use, when you flash the BIOS not only the password, but also all the other configuration data will be reset to the factory defaults, so when you are booting for the first time after a BIOS flash, you should enter the CMOS configuration menu (as explained before) and fix up some things.
Also, when you boot Windows, it may happen that it finds some new device, because of the new configuration of the BIOS, in this case you'll probably need the Windows installation CD because Windows may ask you for some external files. If Windows doesn't see the CD-ROM try to eject and re-insert the CD-ROM again. If Windows can't find the CD-ROM drive and you set it properly from the BIOS config, just reboot with the reset key, and in the next run Windows should find it. However most files needed by the system while installing new hardware could also be found in C:WINDOWS, C:WINDOWSSYSTEM, or C:WINDOWSINF .

Key Disk for Toshiba laptops
Some Toshiba notebooks allow to bypass BIOS by inserting a "key-disk" in the floppy disk drive while booting. To create a Toshiba Keydisk, take a 720Kb or 1.44Mb floppy disk, format it (if it's not formatted yet), then use a hex editor such as Hex Workshop to change the first five bytes of the second sector (the one after the boot sector) and set them to 4B 45 59 00 00 (note that the first three bytes are the ASCII for "KEY" followed by two zeroes). Once you have created the key disk put it into the notebook's drive and turn it on, then push the reset button and when asked for password, press Enter. You will be asked to Set Password again. Press Y and Enter. You'll enter the BIOS configuration where you can set a new password.

Key protected cases
A final note about those old computers (up to 486 and early Pentiums) protected with a key that prevented the use of the mouse and the keyboard or the power button. All you have to do with them is to follow the wires connected to the key hole, locate the jumper to which they are connected and unplug it.

That's all.
http://www.info-directory.info/Article301.html

 

AACS Interim Agreement to phase out analogue from 2010
Posted by Seán Byrne on 01 March 2006 - 00:31 - Source: Ars Technica

As expected, the AACS Interim Agreement covers the ability to allow content owners to decide which high definition outputs their content may put out on during playback. Unfortunately, the AACS license gets much worse, as it also forces a gradual phasing out of analogue outputs and support starting from 2010 until January 2014, from which the license will prohibit the sale of any equipment that decodes AACS with any analogue output.

Beginning 2010, manufacturers will need to start scaling back their analogue support, which likely means that equipment will need to feature a means of disabling HDTV output over analogue in 2011. From December 31st 2010, any equipment that decrypts AACS will only be permitted to output standard definition interlaced video over any analogue output. During this time, models before 2010 can only be sold if they can be reconfigured to enforce the standard definition interlace limitation. Finally, after December 31st, 2013, all equipment must be free of any analogue outputs in order to be compliant with the AACS license.

While 2013 seems a long way ahead yet, some estimate that there will potentially be up to 40 million homes with TVs that cannot handle any form of Digital TV. As a result, the peak sales for AACS enabled players will likely be just before the process of phasing out the analogue outputs. On the other hand, by phasing out analogue outputs on the next generation of DVD players (both HD DVD and Blu-ray use AACS), the movie industry aims to make it clear that TV manufacturers will need to start putting HDMI inputs in all of its models and that customers should avoid buying any TV that lacks a HDMI input.

While much attention has been paid to how next-gen digital formats won't play on many HD-capable displays, including TVs, we're only now getting a look at AACS's other foibles. The agreement, in its current form, requires that manufacturers cease selling any devices capable of analog video output which pass decrypted AACS content after December 31, 2013. Furthermore, a "sunset" period will begin in 2010, during which time manufacturers will need to scale back their analog support. Existing player models of any (compliant) sort may be sold up to December 31, 2011, with one catch: any device manufactured between December 31, 2010 and the ultimate cutoff date in 2013 must have its analog outputs limited to SD Interlace modes only (Composite, S-Video, 480 component, and possible 576i component [the latter will be addressed in the final version of the license]). Older models can also be sold if the manufacturer can programmatically enforce this SD Interlace mode limitation.

The full source article can be read here.

While 2013 seems quite a while ahead, I cannot imagine everyone interested in buying a new HD DVD or Blu-ray player suddenly rushing out to buy a new TV starting 2014, particularly if their TV is currently just new but lacks HDCP support or features analogue inputs only. If new players start requiring consumers to fork out on new TV sets, chances are that a lot of consumers are going to stick with the DVD format or what else they have until it does come to the stage where their TV has reached its “end of life”.

Feel free to discuss about high definition equipment on our forum.
http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/13133

Forcing the analog sunset: the ugly side of the HD revolution

2/24/2006 11:01:41 AM, by Ken "Caesar" Fisher

As reported last week, AACS is a "go." Short for Advanced Access Content System, AACS is a kind of successor to CSS; the specification is being adopted by both HD DVD and Blu-ray for the purposes of securing commercial video content stored on those mechanisms. AACS is far broader than CSS, but that need not concern us now. What I would like to draw some attention to today is the fact that AACS also has some important off-disc ramifications.

The AACS Interim Agreement is a 106-page set of rules for those who wish to license AACS, a list that would presumably include consumer electronics manufacturers and many other technology companies. Although AACS includes, among other things, the ability to allow content owners to determine what kinds of outputs HD video is directed towards, the license also includes a forced sunset for most of those outputs. Put simply, AACS licensees must eliminate analog outputs on consumer electronics devices by 2013 to remain in compliance with the license. Forced obsolescence it is.

The so-called "analog hole" is the bane of Hollywood's attempt to control your entertainment life; put succinctly, if you can hear it or see it on today's consumer electronics devices, you can copy it, with rare exception. The reason is that sooner or later, most signals are converted to analog, and most analog playback devices lack DRM, and analog signals themselves are not particularly well suited to DRM control. Hollywood hates the analog hole, and they have introduced some shocking legislation to shut it down.

While much attention has been paid to how next-gen digital formats won't play on many HD-capable displays, including TVs, we're only now getting a look at AACS's other foibles. The agreement, in its current form, requires that manufacturers cease selling any devices capable of analog video output which pass decrypted AACS content after December 31, 2013. Furthermore, a "sunset" period will begin in 2010, during which time manufacturers will need to scale back their analog support. Existing player models of any (compliant) sort may be sold up to December 31, 2011, with one catch: any device manufactured between December 31, 2010 and the ultimate cutoff date in 2013 must have its analog outputs limited to SD Interlace modes only (Composite, S-Video, 480 component, and possible 576i component [the latter will be addressed in the final version of the license]). Older models can also be sold if the manufacturer can programmatically enforce this SD Interlace mode limitation.
Brave, new future

2013 may seem like a long way away, and it is. For technology planners, it's not so far away, and this can be perhaps best illustrated when we consider the debates over the transition to digital TV in the United States. While the government is drooling in anticipation of the money it will make by selling the spectrum that is currently used by analog TV broadcasts, it's also realistic. The switch to digital TV won't happen until February of 2009, and even then, the government will provide millions in subsidies to homes that will need analog-to-digital converters to make the jump. Lawmakers know that February 2009 is an aggressive move date, but they believe that converters will make it possible to proceed without worrying about how old the TV technology among the populace is.

Put against this backdrop, a sunset for analog outputs beginning in 2011 begins to look questionable in terms of feasibility (leaving aside all other objections at the moment). With some estimating that as many as 40 million homes will lack the ability to receive digital TV signals, a parallel guesstimation can be made: similar (if not greater) numbers of homes will also lack televisions capable of handling protected digital inputs.

The end result will likely be a consumer rush to buy less-crippled players (you can't call them non-crippled because AACS cripples by definition) before the sunset period begins. Otherwise, come 2011, analog viewing on new players will be limited to SD Interlaced quality, and on New Year's Day 2014, analog outputs will be a thing of the past. For the movie industry, then, 2014 is the year that the analog hole starts to walk the plank, as protected transmission comes to dominate. Such is their hope.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060224-6255.html